Is the so-called "sex abuse scandal" a money-spinning scam?

[Lorarose]

Fundamentally that is a problem. The Church by its very definition and mission should be able to police itself. That is the essence of Catholicism.

How is this the “essence of catholicism”.
I am truly bewildered at your belief that catholicism mandates that its priests are above civil law!
Where are you getting this?
I think this attitude breeds arrogance among some priests and bishops who do, indeed, think the rules were not made for them.

Are we going to cede this to the government? I do not agree we should. We have to look deeper for the solution than to simply hand it over to government. The solution will not be handled by men. The solution lies in God and his grace.

Our government handles issues like this everyday.
When a person physically attacks another the police arrest the attacker for assault.
When a man rapes a woman he is arrested for rape.
When a pedophile rapes a child he is arrested.
Why should it be any different for a criminal/priest?

If a priest is caught with drugs - if he is caught stealing - if he commits a hit&run while drunk - if he rapes a woman…for all of these he will get arrested.
Why shouldn’t he get arrested for molesting a child?

Interrogators - the same ones that dredge up so-called repressed memories

No. You are thinking of psychologists who delve in an unproven realm of psychiatry.
I am talking about actual police officers who are trained specifically in interviewing children.

They have shown to be failures as well.

Exactly who are you talking about and in what cases have these people been shown to be “failures”

I am talking about those investigators who question the child.
It is precisely their job to NOT lead the child. These interviews are usually videotaped to prove the child has NOT been led by the investigator.

Yes, the offender (by the way are not all Priests) should be reassigned out of temptation.

Reassigned? Where?
They should not be stripped of their priesthood?

If the bishop is found guilty of wrong doing than he should be dealt with also.

Who is going to investigate the bishop? Who is going to deal with him?

The reality is a little more complex than you are making it out to be.

Please inform me of the “reality”
When it can be shown that a bishop received repeated reports of a priest and insisted on reassigning him to new parishes…this fails the common sense test.
Not reassigned once…not reassigned twice…but given chance after chance after chance. This meant child after child after child was traumatized.
One bishop even passed a well known molester to another diocese just to get him out of his hair. It had nothing to do with listening to counselors - he just didn’t want to deal with him anymore.

I really think you have to think about this in a less vengeful way

And I really think you have to face reality.
I am not concerned with vengeance - I am concerned with the safety of children.
I am horrified that there are catholics out there who are willing to ignore the threat to children.

There is no excuse for any child predators. We should also think on how we are isolating these very same children from looking up to a truly holy Priest and depriving them of wholesome relationships with Priests and laity.

I have NO IDEA what you are talking about here.
I am not suggesting we “isolate” all priests. That is ridiculous.
I am suggesting that child molesters, child rapists be isolated.
Big difference.

By isolating Priests we are allowing Satan to tempt them even more. This is a downward spiral.

No one here is suggesting priests be isolated.
You have created a straw man here.

 

[Lorarose]

I don’t believe the media will cover this with the same zeal they had for the Catholic Church. The facts are out there. They will have to report the fact most is homosexual abuse. They won’t do it.

Hmmm…I thought in the schools it was more of a problem with young male teachers striking up sexual “relationships” with young teenage girls.

 

[Lorarose]

If we removed all the unchaste gay promoting Priests we would have to undergo massive consolodation and inconvenience on the part of the parishioners. Is that a price we are willing to pay?

A true purification of the Church would be a hardship on its members… But what would be the condition of the Church in say 5 or 10 years after?

The fact that vocations ahve been so low in the last 40 years - could it be the Holy Spirit housecleaning?

Why hasn’t it happened - how does one identify the unchaste? There are also some now in positions of protection. Might be a good poll question?

All excellent questions.
Does the Church have an official position concerning gay priests?

 

[bob]

Lorarose:

…I’m not sure where the 1% figure is coming from regarding priests…how do they know for certain how many are guilty?..

Read my post #66.

It has a link to a website which compares Cardinal Ratzinger’s 1% with the Times 1.8%.

According to CNN Cardinal Ratzinger, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, is probably the only person in the church who has read the all case files of the abuses that has occurred.

No one here is disputing that abuse has occurred.
(It has)

No one is denying that abuse should be tolerated.
(To varying degrees, depends on diocese)

No one is saying the the press should be silenced.
(You cannot deny that the press sells well on scandal)

You are barking up the wrong tree in your posts.

The thread is - “Has it turned into a big scam?”.
YES, IT HAS.

 

[bob]

Lorarose:

All excellent questions.
Does the Church have an official position concerning gay priests?

“although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.” Cardinal Ratzinger, 1986

The church has many times said, “We condemn the sin, not the sinner.”

This applies to priests, religious and lay persons. Which means, you are welcomed to the church, whatever your inclinations are, but do not sin again.

Sure, there are pedophiles, gays, alcholics, gamblers, SINNERS, in the priesthood and religious - no more, perhaps, less than the average population in percentages.

Christ came to save sinners, we hope those who sin repent and ask for His forgiveness.

But we are diverging from the thread…

 

[Lorarose]

No one here is disputing that abuse has occurred.
(It has)

I think the original post is disputing that. That’s why the clients of the lawyers are “dubious” If they had really sufferred abuse they wouldn’t be “dubious” would they?

If the 1% factor is accurate…why are you comfortable with it?
Do you understand how many children can be victimized by ONE pervert?
Many of these guys are very busy bees – and every person assaulted was more than just a number.

No one is denying that abuse should be tolerated.
(To varying degrees, depends on diocese)

Some here are arguing that criminal activity should not be reported to the police.
Some are arguing these men should be forgiven (yes they should), and part of that forgiveness is allowing them to continue their service as a priest.

You are barking up the wrong tree in your posts.

The thread is - “Has it turned into a big scam?”.
YES, IT HAS.

I strongly disagree

“although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.” Cardinal Ratzinger, 1986

Is this Ratzinger voicing his personal opinion? Or is this Ratzinger voicing the opinion of the Church? In other words…should this be taken to mean the Church believes the priesthood should consist solely of heterosexual men?

Sure, there are pedophiles, gays, alcholics, gamblers, SINNERS, in the priesthood and religious - no more, perhaps, less than the average population in percentages

This is the attitude that really bothers me.
The priesthood is not supposed to reflect the average population!
ANY degree of corruption- no matter how small- is a problem exactly BECAUSE of who they are representing!
Besides that…while it is true all priests suffer from personal sin - like we all do - they should not be considered above the law when they commit CRIMES.

Christ came to save sinners, we hope those who sin repent and ask for His forgiveness

Another straw man.
No one is claiming these men not seek reconciliation with Christ.

 

[buffalo]

Lorarose:

How is this the “essence of catholicism”.
I am truly bewildered at your belief that catholicism mandates that its priests are above civil law!
Where are you getting this?
I think this attitude breeds arrogance among some priests and bishops who do, indeed, think the rules were not made for them.

I never claimed that clergy are above the civil law. What I am trying to help you understand is the Law of God is the highest law. The essence of Catholicism is for Catholics to obey the higher law. Generally, civil laws are of a lower order. We are now moving this into a lower law. As Catholics we should be operating in the higher law.

We should expect Catholics to not have to drop down into civil law.

However, if they do, they then are liable to the justice of civil and criminal law. A criminal activity is a criminal activity and should then be referred to authorities.

Now the question is what is pedophilia? Is it an addiction or sickness that renders the offender less culpable such as a mentally retarded committing a crime? Or is it a pure criminal act? When did this status change?

 

[Lorarose]

I never claimed that clergy are above the civil law. What I am trying to help you understand is the Law of God is the highest law. The essence of Catholicism is for Catholics to obey the higher law. Generally, civil laws are of a lower order. We are now moving this into a lower law. As Catholics we should be operating in the higher law.

So…despite the fact that priests DO answer to civil authorities (drunk driving, hit & run, embezzlement…etc) You don’t think they should answer to the civil authorities when it comes to child molestation.
You and I will never see eye to eye on that.

We should expect Catholics to not have to drop down into civil law.

That makes no sense whatsoever.
Catholics are expected to be law abiding citizens and must pay the consequences when they break those laws.

Now the question is what is pedophilia? Is it an addiction or sickness that renders the offender less culpable such as a mentally retarded committing a crime? Or is it a pure criminal act? When did this status change?

It is an addiction. It is a compulsion.
When did what status change? Don’t you watch the news?
Pedophiles are never cured!

They get “rehab” and are released back into society - only to relapse over and over.
A florida girl was just buried alive by her pedophile neighbor. They are predators.
I have seen this face of evil and I will never forget it.

You are naive.

 

[buffalo]

Lorarose:

So…despite the fact that priests DO answer to civil authorities (drunk driving, hit & run, embezzlement…etc) You don’t think they should answer to the civil authorities when it comes to child molestation.
You and I will never see eye to eye on that.

.

How did you get that from what I wrote? You are definitely reading these posts with the wrong attitude. Never did I say or will I say offenders should not answer to authorities when charged.

Catholic teaching is that we should use the courts as a last resort to settle a dispute amongst two people. Now obviously if one breaks the law, you have the right to report him and ask that charges be filed. If you decide between yourselves that it can be settled without the system being involved that is your option. It happens all the time

And you avoided the question - is it a sickness or not? When did the status change?

 

[buffalo]

Lorarose:

This is the attitude that really bothers me.
The priesthood is not supposed to reflect the average population!

You have made the point I have been making right along.

 

[Lorarose]

And you avoided the question - is it a sickness or not? When did the status change?

When did WHAT status change?

 

[bob]

Lorarose:

If the 1% factor is accurate…why are you comfortable with it?
Do you understand how many children can be victimized by ONE pervert?
Many of these guys are very busy bees – and every person assaulted was more than just a number.

Did I say I was comfortable with it? Do not put words in my mouth.

This is what I said:

Bob:

No one is denying that abuse should be tolerated.

No one is comfortable. One abused is one too many. Based on Cardinal Ratizinger’s data about 1 to 4. Over 1000 priests, over 4000 abuses and alleged abuses.
The point is - the 99% are stimatised by the 1%.
How many percent of of Americans are in jail? Are the rest of the Americans condemned because of those in prison?

Should every parent, grandparent and everyone who has contributed to the criminal activity of each and every criminal(besides the abusers) be made to pay millions because in some way or other they have contributed to the crime?

Lorarose:

Some here are arguing that criminal activity should not be reported to the police.
Some are arguing these men should be forgiven (yes they should), and part of that forgiveness is allowing them to continue their service as a priest.

Correction. Alleged criminal activity.
Should the bishop not first find out if the allegations were true first?

Did Christ allow the adulteress to be stoned?
I however cannot comment on the ability of individual dioceses to handle each and every case.
But yes, the church should try to get grips of the situation first and the bishop decides depending on the severity of the abuse.
There are many areas where a priest can be safely deployed after counselling.

Lorarose:

Is this Ratzinger voicing his personal opinion? Or is this Ratzinger voicing the opinion of the Church? In other words…should this be taken to mean the Church believes the priesthood should consist solely of heterosexual men?

Official Church document entitled: “On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons”

wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_Pastoral_Care_of_Homosexual_Persons

Lorarose:

This is the attitude that really bothers me.
The priesthood is not supposed to reflect the average population!
ANY degree of corruption- no matter how small- is a problem exactly BECAUSE of who they are representing!

Can you be assured of a 100% screening process?
Are all Law Makers above the law?
Are all lawyers working for justice’s sake?
Are all policemen clean?
Are all presidents presidential?
Are all doctors competent?
Did Christ choose 12 perfect Apostles?

If you have a perfect way let the church know.
You are asking for the impossible. You live in Utopia?

Lorarose:

Besides that…while it is true all priests suffer from personal sin - like we all do - they should not be considered above the law when they commit CRIMES.

I never said that they are above the law.
No. Every case has to be studied individually.
Not every case deserves the severest punishment.
Not every case deserves a millions of dollars payout.
Again Christ and the adulteress.

Lorarose:

Another straw man.
No one is claiming these men not seek reconciliation with Christ.

I am saying that there are genuine penitents amongst the abusers. Again every case has to be judged on its own.

1. It is important that not every accused is guilty.
2. And not every guilty person is guilty of every crime that is subsequently alleged against him.

 

[Lorarose]

How many percent of of Americans are in jail? Are the rest of the Americans condemned because of those in prison?

Another straw man.
Who here has suggested all priests be condemned for the actions of a few?

Should the bishop not first find out if the allegations were true first?

No. It is not his area of expertise. He is not an officer of the law.
If a priest rapes a woman - do you really think she should get on the phone with the bishop? Or the police?
Why would it be any different with a child?

Did Christ allow the adulteress to be stoned?

What does that have to do with anything?
We could take that reasoning and refuse to hold anyone accountable for anything.

I however cannot comment on the ability of individual dioceses to handle each and every case.

Exactly…but law enforcement has the experience of dealing with these situations on a daily basis…unfortunately.

But yes, the church should try to get grips of the situation first and the bishop decides depending on the severity of the abuse.

It’s not their area of expertise. It is not their job.

There are many areas where a priest can be safely deployed after counselling.

Where?

Can you be assured of a 100% screening process?

Nope…I’m just asking the Church show common sense in dealing with pedophiles and pederasts.

Are all Law Makers above the law?

Your point?

Are all lawyers working for justice’s sake?

No. That doesn’t mean their clients are liars.
If I had hired a lawyer…I would have more concerned with his ability to represent me well than trying to decipher his motivations for taking my case.

Are all policemen clean?

Your point?

Are all presidents presidential?

Your point?

Are all doctors competent?

Your point?

Did Christ choose 12 perfect Apostles?

No. That’s why I have not allowed one man’s evil criminal act convince me to leave the Church.
I do know more many good holy priests.
That doesn’t mean the bad ones shouldn’t pay for what they’ve done.

If you have a perfect way let the church know.
You are asking for the impossible. You live in Utopia?

How predictable! I was WONDERING when your insults would begin.
Do I live in Utopia because I think child molesters should be prosecuted for their crimes? That I think they are fair game in civil court? That I think they should NEVER be allowed near children again? That I think child molesting priests should be stripped of their priesthood?
No…I don’t think so. And it appears that some bishops agree with me as some bishops have, indeed, stripped some of these “priest” imposters of their priesthood.

Not every case deserves a millions of dollars payout.

True. Of course, not every case has resulted in millions of dollars in payout.
I am acquainted with four men who took their case to civil court.
The priest had admitted his crime. He had been stripped of his priesthood. These men needed counseling. One man needed rehab. Some had difficulty having normal relationships with women.
They have been terribly scarred for life.
The case was thrown out due to statute of limitations.
No money. Nada.

Again Christ and the adulteress.

Again…your point.
I guess jurors should never find anyone guilty because they themselves are sinners too?

I am saying that there are genuine penitents amongst the abusers. Again every case has to be judged on its own.

Many terrible abusers claim they are “sorry”
But they feel compelled to abuse again. When they “relapse” it means another innocent child’s life is traumatized.
How much are we willing to risk here?

1. It is important that not every accused is guilty.
2. And not every guilty person is guilty of every crime that is subsequently alleged against him.

1. True. That is why law enforcement investigates and analyzes testimony and evidence before they proceed with arrest.
   Bishops are out of their league here.
2. What evidence do you have that a “guilty” priest was accused of crimes he did not commit?

 

[buffalo]

I believe that Lorarose is advocating any offender (guilty or innocent) to be kept in jail for life or moved to a remote island.

The same thing is being played out when child protective service removes children from their home based on an allegation. Guilty till proven innocent. The power has been shifted to mother governement. I personally know of cases where a child is mad at Mom and Dad for being rightfully disciplined reports an abuse to school officials. Should the rights of parents and adults be protected along with the children, too?

 

[snoopy]

*QUOTE=bob] *
Should the bishop not first find out if the allegations were true first?

But yes, the church should try to get grips of the situation first and the bishop decides depending on the severity of the abuse.
There are many areas where a priest can be safely deployed after counselling.

Absolutely Not!!! They should be turned over to the police first, and then it can be sorted out. You are going back to the dark ages when bishops decided if there was a crime or not, and they decided on the punishment. THIS IS A CRIME, and it should be treated like one. Seriously, would you only turn the priest over to the bishop if he committed murder, or drove drunk, or embezzled from the parish. Why are not the lives and souls of our children on equal par? I know you are a good, caring person, but it is frustrating that you just don’t get it.

 

[buffalo]

*QUOTE=bob]
*
Should the bishop not first find out if the allegations were true first?

But yes, the church should try to get grips of the situation first and the bishop decides depending on the severity of the abuse.
There are many areas where a priest can be safely deployed after counselling.

Absolutely Not!!! They should be turned over to the police first, and then it can be sorted out. You are going back to the dark ages when bishops decided if there was a crime or not, and they decided on the punishment. THIS IS A CRIME, and it should be treated like one. Seriously, would you only turn the priest over to the bishop if he committed murder, or drove drunk, or embezzled from the parish. Why are not the lives and souls of our children on equal par? I know you are a good, caring person, but it is frustrating that you just don’t get it.

Laws are put on the books after a “discovery” period. I submit that is the kind of thing that was going on years ago. Every Bishop who got caught in this tangle who had good motives should not be painted with the broadbrush of evil.

Maybe someone more knowledgeable than I can answer this - when did the laws of pedophilia and pederasty hit the books?
Were the authorities knowledgeable about these crimes?

 

[snoopy]

buffalo:

Laws are put on the books after a “discovery” period. I submit that is the kind of thing that was going on years ago. Every Bishop who got caught in this tangle who had good motives should not be painted with the broadbrush of evil.

Maybe someone more knowledgeable than I can answer this - when did the laws of pedophilia and pederasty hit the books?
Were the authorities knowledgeable about these crimes?

Good questions.
When I was a child in about 1969, a man who made deliveries to our farm was convicted of molesting some other children on his route. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison and served about 5. That was in 1969 in one of the tiniest towns in America. Now, if this small town of less than 1,000 people back in 1969 could figure out this is a crime, don’t you think that some of the most brilliant men in the world who are saavy enough to become bishops and cardinals in an unbelievably closed and secret society would be smart enough to figure out this is a crime? I ask the question: Didn’t they see a pattern? How many times do you have to be confronted with evidence to start getting suspicious?. And if you are suspicious of a child possibly being in danger, For God’s sake, remove him or her from harm’s way!!!

 

[bob]

Lorarose:

Another straw man.
Who here has suggested all priests be condemned for the actions of a few?

The fact that everything has been blown out of proportion.
People are leaving the church because of the actions of a few. People refusing to give money to the church because of the abuse.

Snoopy:

Absolutely Not!!! They should be turned over to the police first, and then it can be sorted out.

Lorarose:

No. It is not his area of expertise. He is not an officer of the law.
If a priest rapes a woman - do you really think she should get on the phone with the bishop? Or the police?
Why would it be any different with a child?

If your child has been accused of bashing another in school. Would you prefer that the school call the police immediately or that the principal investigates it first?

If your neighbour tells you that your husband has raped her, do you ask him first and hear his side of the story or call in the police immediately?

If your child alleges that your brother, uncle, etc has abused him. Do you confront the accused first or call in the police to have him arrested?

Is that not within the principal’s/your competence?

Lorarose:

What does that have to do with anything?
We could take that reasoning and refuse to hold anyone accountable for anything.

It means you are condemning everyone with a blanket answer - put them behind bars forever no matter what.

Lorarose:

Where?

Where they do not deal with children on a daily basis.

Lorarose:

Nope…I’m just asking the Church show common sense in dealing with pedophiles and pederasts.

That is not what you said: you said:

Lorarose:

This is the attitude that really bothers me.
The priesthood is not supposed to reflect the average population!
ANY degree of corruption- no matter how small- is a problem exactly BECAUSE of who they are representing!

If the priesthood does not reflect the average population where do you expect that we get them?
A colony of enuchs?
A hosts of angels?
No matter how small is still a problem - you expect 0%.

Your idea of common sense is to keep them behind bars forever because that is the only way to keep them away from kids.

Lorarose:

Your point?

My point to all these is that you seem to hold the church responsible for not screening each and every potential pedophile entering the priesthood. And you seem hold the church responsible for each child abuse.
You will not be satisfied until there are no priests because that is the only way to achieve 0 abuse.

Lorarose:

How predictable! I was WONDERING when your insults would begin.
Do I live in Utopia because I think child molesters should be prosecuted for their crimes? That I think they are fair game in civil court? That I think they should NEVER be allowed near children again? That I think child molesting priests should be stripped of their priesthood?

I apologise if you take insult at my suggestion that you live in Utopia because that is the only place that abuse cannot happen.

Lorarose:

No…I don’t think so. And it appears that some bishops agree with me as some bishops have, indeed, stripped some of these “priest” imposters of their priesthood.

I never advocate that all should be forgiven given a slap on the wrist and allow to abuse children again. The guilty should be punished. Again severity and degree of penitence should be taken into account.

Lorarose:

Again…your point.
I guess jurors should never find anyone guilty because they themselves are sinners too?

Christ came and institute forgivness for the penitent. You condemn them to eternal damnation.
Which church do you belong to that does not forgive?

Lorarose:

Many terrible abusers claim they are “sorry”
But they feel compelled to abuse again. When they “relapse” it means another innocent child’s life is traumatized.
How much are we willing to risk here?

Your source? Facts & figures?
Does that mean that criminals who have finished their sentences still need to be incarcerated as there is no way to know whether their penitence is genuine or whether they will relapse?

Where are you going to put all of them?
Send them to Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo?

What’s the purpose of confession? Do you confess the same sins again and again or you only sin each sin once?

Lorarose:

1. What evidence do you have that a “guilty” priest was accused of crimes he did not commit?

What I am saying is that a scammer tags on to a convicted priest and says “me too”.
Statistically, that is a possibility.

 

[buffalo]

snoopy:

r I ask the question: Didn’t they see a pattern? How many times do you have to be confronted with evidence to start getting suspicious?. And if you are suspicious of a child possibly being in danger, For God’s sake, remove him or her from harm’s way!!!

Lorarose says that even 1 child is too many. I happen to agree. But as bob posts we would have to live in Utopia.

 

[snoopy]

buffalo:

Lorarose says that even 1 child is too many. I happen to agree. But as bob posts we would have to live in Utopia.

No, we do not have to live in Utopia. We must simply live in a world where people are accountable for their actions. If they are put in a position of power and authority, then do your job and protect the innocent, be shepherd’s of your flock which include innocent children. If a bishop or cardinal is confronted with abuse of a child, remove the offending priest immediately, contact the police and sort it out with the help of professionals who know what questions to ask and how to get at the truth. Then if the priest admits he did this or is proven guilty, do not, under any circumstances, place him back in another parish where he can abuse again and again. Do not slip the family hush money with restrictions that this will never be spoken of again, and do not treat the victim and his family as though they somehow were responsible. If the priest is guilty, he should spend time in prison, be stripped of his priesthood, and the church should make reparations to the victim as any other walk of life would have them do, and there should be lifetime counseling for the victim as needed. Then the victims would know the church is serious about caring for it’s flock and wanting justice to be served. Then forgiveness can be offered and maybe the healing can begin.